Bob Cleek

Interesting discussion! The term "kit bashing" seems to have evolved over time to convey the meanings others have noted. I'm not sure when it first came into common usage, but the first time I heard it used was in the second half of the seventies. I was living in Marin County at the time and had for many years. We had something of an "influx" of folks moving into my neighborhood who had been recruited by George Lucas, who was setting up his operations there, primarily, at first, Industrial Light and Magic ("ILM") and later Lucasfilm. I remember meeting one guy who moved in a couple of houses down from us telling me when I asked what he did for a living, "I'm a model maker." Of course, my immediate response was, "You mean people can make a living at it?"   After that, we were "off to the races." He was the first guy who told me about what they called "kit bashing." My understanding was that the term was commonly used by movie industry model makers to mean using off-the-shelf plastic model kit parts to build entirely different models from what the kits' original subjects represented. The technique was originated by model makers working on the movie 2001 - A Space Odyssey. They built a lot of models from scratch, but when they needed bits and pieces, they'd take them from plastic kits which had nothing to do with the model they were making. They'd often buy large numbers of the same kit just to obtain a sufficient number of a particular part they wanted that was in each kit. These kit parts which the modelers used frequently and in large numbers they called "greeblies," which I think was just a made-up word. It was all quite fascinating and at the time something of a "trade secret." (Lucas even kept the name and address of ILM secret for a long time. It was just a nondescript warehouse in an industrial district on Kerner Street in San Rafael, CA with a sign on the front that simply said "The Kerner Company.")
 
I found this photo online showing ILM's "kit bashing" shop in action building the original Millenium Falcon, Han Solo's space ship in the Star Wars movies.  Note the boxes of kits on the shelves in the background. Note the three rectangular parts with the black holes in their centers in the foreground laying on top of the front of the model. These appear to be tank body decks, the holes being where the turrets would be placed on the tank model. The second picture shows them in the finished model where they became exhaust ports or something like that.
 

 
 

 
Below is a yet-to-be weathered section of an ILM spaceship. Some may be able to recognize parts from specific model kits. I'm guessing there are some aircraft carrier parts in there somewhere!
 

 
 
Below is the original "droid strip," the top of the "X-wing fighter" right behind the pilot's seat, flown by Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars movie with the original model kits from which the parts identified were sourced:
 

 
Close inspection of later Star Wars kits marketed to the public show some differences in the details. I wonder if some details weren't changed in the later model kits to avoid violating the original kit manufacturer's copyrights. I'd certainly hate to think Lucasfilm was authorizing the production of "pirated" kits!   Just kidding. I knew the lady who worked for Lucas writing "cease and desist" letters to anybody who so much as thought of violating a Lucasfilm copyright. They were very scrupulous about that.
 
So, I'd say that to be really accurate in the use of the term "kit bashing," it should only apply to building something entirely different from what the kit the parts came from was. Using tank kit parts to depict something different from what they were on the tank kit to portray a part on a ship model is "kit bashing." Using an anchor winch casting from one ship model kit to portray an anchor winch on another ship model isn't "kit bashing." That's just "parts swapping." But, it's really not all that important in the grand scheme of things, is it? 
 
 

Interesting discussion! The term "kit bashing" seems to have evolved over time to convey the meanings others have noted. I'm not sure when it first came into common usage, but the first time I heard it used was in the second half of the seventies. I was living in Marin County at the time and had for many years. We had something of an "influx" of folks moving into my neighborhood who had been recruited by George Lucas, who was setting up his operations there, primarily, at first, Industrial Light and Magic ("ILM") and later Lucasfilm. I remember meeting one guy who moved in a couple of houses down from us telling me when I asked what he did for a living, "I'm a model maker." Of course, my immediate response was, "You mean people can make a living at it?"   After that, we were "off to the races." He was the first guy who told me about what they called "kit bashing." My understanding was that the term was commonly used by movie industry model makers to mean using off-the-shelf plastic model kit parts to build entirely different models from what the kits' original subjects represented. The technique was originated by model makers working on the movie 2001 - A Space Odyssey. They built a lot of models from scratch, but when they needed bits and pieces, they'd take them from plastic kits which had nothing to do with the model they were making. They'd often buy large numbers of the same kit just to obtain a sufficient number of a particular part they wanted that was in each kit. These kit parts which the modelers used frequently and in large numbers they called "greeblies," which I think was just a made-up word. It was all quite fascinating and at the time something of a "trade secret." (Lucas even kept the name and address of ILM secret for a long time. It was just a nondescript warehouse in an industrial district on Kerner Street in San Rafael, CA with a sign on the front that simply said "The Kerner Company.")
 
I found this photo online showing ILM's "kit bashing" shop in action building the original Millenium Falcon, Han Solo's space ship in the Star Wars movies.  Note the boxes of kits on the shelves in the background. Note the three rectangular parts with the black holes in their centers in the foreground laying on top of the front of the model. These appear to be tank body decks, the holes being where the turrets would be placed on the tank model. The second picture shows them in the finished model where they became exhaust ports or something like that.
 

 
 

 
Below is a yet-to-be weathered section of an ILM spaceship. Some may be able to recognize parts from specific model kits. I'm guessing there are some aircraft carrier parts in there somewhere!
 

 
 
Below is the original "droid strip," the top of the "X-wing fighter" right behind the pilot's seat, flown by Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars movie with the original model kits from which the parts identified were sourced:
 

 
Close inspection of later Star Wars kits marketed to the public show some differences in the details. I wonder if some details weren't changed in the later model kits to avoid violating the original kit manufacturer's copyrights. I'd certainly hate to think Lucasfilm was authorizing the production of "pirated" kits!   Just kidding. I knew the lady who worked for Lucas writing "cease and desist" letters to anybody who so much as thought of violating a Lucasfilm copyright. They were very scrupulous about that.
 
So, I'd say that to be really accurate in the use of the term "kit bashing," it should only apply to building something entirely different from what the kit the parts came from was. Using tank kit parts to depict something different from what they were on the tank kit to portray a part on a ship model is "kit bashing." Using an anchor winch casting from one ship model kit to portray an anchor winch on another ship model isn't "kit bashing." That's just "parts swapping." But, it's really not all that important in the grand scheme of things, is it? 
 
 

Interesting discussion! The term "kit bashing" seems to have evolved over time to convey the meanings others have noted. I'm not sure when it first came into common usage, but the first time I heard it used was in the second half of the seventies. I was living in Marin County at the time and had for many years. We had something of an "influx" of folks moving into my neighborhood who had been recruited by George Lucas, who was setting up his operations there, primarily, at first, Industrial Light and Magic ("ILM") and later Lucasfilm. I remember meeting one guy who moved in a couple of houses down from us telling me when I asked what he did for a living, "I'm a model maker." Of course, my immediate response was, "You mean people can make a living at it?"   After that, we were "off to the races." He was the first guy who told me about what they called "kit bashing." My understanding was that the term was commonly used by movie industry model makers to mean using off-the-shelf plastic model kit parts to build entirely different models from what the kits' original subjects represented. The technique was originated by model makers working on the movie 2001 - A Space Odyssey. They built a lot of models from scratch, but when they needed bits and pieces, they'd take them from plastic kits which had nothing to do with the model they were making. They'd often buy large numbers of the same kit just to obtain a sufficient number of a particular part they wanted that was in each kit. These kit parts which the modelers used frequently and in large numbers they called "greeblies," which I think was just a made-up word. It was all quite fascinating and at the time something of a "trade secret." (Lucas even kept the name and address of ILM secret for a long time. It was just a nondescript warehouse in an industrial district on Kerner Street in San Rafael, CA with a sign on the front that simply said "The Kerner Company.")
 
I found this photo online showing ILM's "kit bashing" shop in action building the original Millenium Falcon, Han Solo's space ship in the Star Wars movies.  Note the boxes of kits on the shelves in the background. Note the three rectangular parts with the black holes in their centers in the foreground laying on top of the front of the model. These appear to be tank body decks, the holes being where the turrets would be placed on the tank model. The second picture shows them in the finished model where they became exhaust ports or something like that.
 

 
 

 
Below is a yet-to-be weathered section of an ILM spaceship. Some may be able to recognize parts from specific model kits. I'm guessing there are some aircraft carrier parts in there somewhere!
 

 
 
Below is the original "droid strip," the top of the "X-wing fighter" right behind the pilot's seat, flown by Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars movie with the original model kits from which the parts identified were sourced:
 

 
Close inspection of later Star Wars kits marketed to the public show some differences in the details. I wonder if some details weren't changed in the later model kits to avoid violating the original kit manufacturer's copyrights. I'd certainly hate to think Lucasfilm was authorizing the production of "pirated" kits!   Just kidding. I knew the lady who worked for Lucas writing "cease and desist" letters to anybody who so much as thought of violating a Lucasfilm copyright. They were very scrupulous about that.
 
So, I'd say that to be really accurate in the use of the term "kit bashing," it should only apply to building something entirely different from what the kit the parts came from was. Using tank kit parts to depict something different from what they were on the tank kit to portray a part on a ship model is "kit bashing." Using an anchor winch casting from one ship model kit to portray an anchor winch on another ship model isn't "kit bashing." That's just "parts swapping." But, it's really not all that important in the grand scheme of things, is it? 
 
 

Interesting discussion! The term "kit bashing" seems to have evolved over time to convey the meanings others have noted. I'm not sure when it first came into common usage, but the first time I heard it used was in the second half of the seventies. I was living in Marin County at the time and had for many years. We had something of an "influx" of folks moving into my neighborhood who had been recruited by George Lucas, who was setting up his operations there, primarily, at first, Industrial Light and Magic ("ILM") and later Lucasfilm. I remember meeting one guy who moved in a couple of houses down from us telling me when I asked what he did for a living, "I'm a model maker." Of course, my immediate response was, "You mean people can make a living at it?"   After that, we were "off to the races." He was the first guy who told me about what they called "kit bashing." My understanding was that the term was commonly used by movie industry model makers to mean using off-the-shelf plastic model kit parts to build entirely different models from what the kits' original subjects represented. The technique was originated by model makers working on the movie 2001 - A Space Odyssey. They built a lot of models from scratch, but when they needed bits and pieces, they'd take them from plastic kits which had nothing to do with the model they were making. They'd often buy large numbers of the same kit just to obtain a sufficient number of a particular part they wanted that was in each kit. These kit parts which the modelers used frequently and in large numbers they called "greeblies," which I think was just a made-up word. It was all quite fascinating and at the time something of a "trade secret." (Lucas even kept the name and address of ILM secret for a long time. It was just a nondescript warehouse in an industrial district on Kerner Street in San Rafael, CA with a sign on the front that simply said "The Kerner Company.")
 
I found this photo online showing ILM's "kit bashing" shop in action building the original Millenium Falcon, Han Solo's space ship in the Star Wars movies.  Note the boxes of kits on the shelves in the background. Note the three rectangular parts with the black holes in their centers in the foreground laying on top of the front of the model. These appear to be tank body decks, the holes being where the turrets would be placed on the tank model. The second picture shows them in the finished model where they became exhaust ports or something like that.
 

 
 

 
Below is a yet-to-be weathered section of an ILM spaceship. Some may be able to recognize parts from specific model kits. I'm guessing there are some aircraft carrier parts in there somewhere!
 

 
 
Below is the original "droid strip," the top of the "X-wing fighter" right behind the pilot's seat, flown by Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars movie with the original model kits from which the parts identified were sourced:
 

 
Close inspection of later Star Wars kits marketed to the public show some differences in the details. I wonder if some details weren't changed in the later model kits to avoid violating the original kit manufacturer's copyrights. I'd certainly hate to think Lucasfilm was authorizing the production of "pirated" kits!   Just kidding. I knew the lady who worked for Lucas writing "cease and desist" letters to anybody who so much as thought of violating a Lucasfilm copyright. They were very scrupulous about that.
 
So, I'd say that to be really accurate in the use of the term "kit bashing," it should only apply to building something entirely different from what the kit the parts came from was. Using tank kit parts to depict something different from what they were on the tank kit to portray a part on a ship model is "kit bashing." Using an anchor winch casting from one ship model kit to portray an anchor winch on another ship model isn't "kit bashing." That's just "parts swapping." But, it's really not all that important in the grand scheme of things, is it? 
 
 

To make a living selling milled dimensioned modeling wood, yes, but that's only because the consumers are hung up on three or four now-exotic (over-harvested) species that were once plentiful and commonly used. To become a self-sufficient modeler, all you really need is a good (i.e. a Byrnes) micro-table saw and perhaps a (Byrnes) thickness sander. Heavier machinery which saves much labor in reducing larger stock to modeling-sized billets can usually be begged or borrowed when that task occasionally arises. There are many great species for modeling that routinely end up in the chipper because they don't exist in size or quantity sufficient to make milling it on a commercial scale worthwhile. That certainly doesn't mean that commonly available woods like apple, persimmon, satin walnut, chestnut, holly and such aren't probably readily available for the scrounging at the municipal brush dump or by plying a friendly arborist with a bottle of Jack so he'll save you some of the good stuff when he comes across it. 

To make a living selling milled dimensioned modeling wood, yes, but that's only because the consumers are hung up on three or four now-exotic (over-harvested) species that were once plentiful and commonly used. To become a self-sufficient modeler, all you really need is a good (i.e. a Byrnes) micro-table saw and perhaps a (Byrnes) thickness sander. Heavier machinery which saves much labor in reducing larger stock to modeling-sized billets can usually be begged or borrowed when that task occasionally arises. There are many great species for modeling that routinely end up in the chipper because they don't exist in size or quantity sufficient to make milling it on a commercial scale worthwhile. That certainly doesn't mean that commonly available woods like apple, persimmon, satin walnut, chestnut, holly and such aren't probably readily available for the scrounging at the municipal brush dump or by plying a friendly arborist with a bottle of Jack so he'll save you some of the good stuff when he comes across it. 

Thanks for the suggested reading of the Oxford Companion..I found a used copy for $5 👍📖

When you do get around to handling it, expect it to get a lot of use. It's one of those "there and nowhere else" sort of reference works.
 

After reading your post and the tasks you anticipate doing, I would say that a table saw is the tool you will use the most in those applications. This is especially true if you anticipate fabricating deck gratings, window frames, and such. However, it must be a highly accurate and sufficiently powerful mini-table saw. (It's got to be able to zip through rock-hard wood, not just balsa and basswood!) Accuracy is really critical. You'll also want a saw with a good precision cross-sawing sled.
 
"If you take milling/planking your own timber out of the equation would a Byrnes table saw or a mini mill be of more use for the tasks I listed."  The table saw is still the more useful by a long shot, in my opinion. Of greater concern, however, is the fact that you are not likely able to "take milling/planking your own timber out of the equation." At an ever-increasing rate, pre-milled dimensioned modeling wood is becoming unavailable. There just isn't enough demand for it that anybody can make a living making and selling it. There's some poor and medium grade modeling woods still commercially available in dimensioned sizes, but practically none in quality species anymore, but you'll quickly run into problems finding the size you need.  Moreover, when you mill your own on your own table saw, you have a far wider selection of woods to chose from, many which can be sourced for nothing or close to it. Just look at all the posts in here from people asking "Where do I buy wood?" 
 
You can use the MSW search engine and read what is probably the most extensive collection of hands-on reviews and information on the Byrnes table saw anywhere on the internet. You aren't likely to see one in the flesh before you buy it unless you find your way to somebody near you who has one, or visit Jim Byrnes in Florida where he builds them. See: https://byrnesmodelmachines.com/ I do not expect anyone will argue with the assertion that there is no mini-saw available anywhere that comes anywhere close to the Byrnes table saw. It's as simple as that. Spending money on anything else means getting a lot less "bang for your buck." The Byrnes saw, while not inexpensive, it wicked accurate and an extremely high quality piece of machinery. There's no way anybody beats their personalized customer service. That's what one should expect from what is essentially a bespoke high-tolerance machine tool.
 
That said, I regret to inform you that if the reports from your countrymen are accurate, shipping, import duties, and taxes raise the cost of any machine from Byrnes Model Machines, or much of anything else from this side of the Pond, beyond what many feel they can justify spending. As I'm sure this situation affects everyone in in the UK similarly, you may be able to find a "work around" that makes it less painful for you than others have found those drawbacks to be.

Eberhard,  You have kindly pointed out the obvious which I failed to notice.  What you wrote makes a lot of sense.  I checked on the architect's drawings and the gaff indeed has 6 inches clearance should it lie perfectly horizontal.    Thank you very much!!
Allan

Just a guess, as don't know, how the foresail is handled: if you lower the gaff, the angle may change, depending, how co-ordinated the two halliards are handled; there is the chance that the gaff comes down plus/minus horizontal, so it would have to still clear the space between the two masts, i.e. its maximum length has to be less than the distance between the masts.
 
I have seen quite a few illustrations that shows the gaff being lowered in a rather haphazard fashion ...
 

When you do get around to handling it, expect it to get a lot of use. It's one of those "there and nowhere else" sort of reference works.
 

I've just received The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea, hardcover version from amazon.uk for £6.65. It is the 2005, 2nd edition and looks brand new and unopened.  I will leave it lying in the shed for a few days before handling it.
 
Thanks,
 
Richard

All that remains is to add anchors and flags.
 

 
 
The crew was originally supposed to be on the model, unfortunately I was struck by a very cruel life event, when my husband died a few months ago and it changed a lot in my life. There will be only two figures on the model that will symbolize me and my husband, it is a remembrance and a tribute to the best person I have ever known and spent with him more than 20 years. He had a wish for me to successfully complete the Royal Katherine, and I want to fulfill his wish as best as possible.
 
Doris

Doris, I want to send you a big hug, and tell you that I will be very proud of you to see that you have managed to do the best modeling that exists.
I'm so sorry Doris.

Sorry to hear about your husband.  You have made a wonderful model, and I am sure he will appreciate the thought of having the entire ship to you and him.

Fortunately for the OP they live in the UK and Castello boxwood is easily available in very handy sizes
 
https://shop.exotichardwoods.co.uk/boxwoods/page/4/
 
So you don't need to cut down or dry out your own wood.  You just need tools to shape what you want to make.  If you need to see the tools I don't live a million miles from you and if you're in the Midlands you are welcome to try out my tools.
 
Importing a Byrnes saw is not that big a deal - Jim has just made me an 18' table for mine.  I'm only a truck driver and I got it sorted out so it cannot be that expensive.  Just compare it to a set of golf clubs that my mates buy - you'll be quids in.  Luckily I don't play golf

And, if you can pull this off, in your place, after looking back at missed opportunities, situations that I thought would always be there but were really a one time chance,  I would be greedy.  I would be very, very greedy.

The ultimate wood for the fine detail work that you anticipate doing is Boxwood.  You live near a wonderful source of this for most of us ultra rare wood- the formal gardens of large country homes.  Sadly, many of these shrubs are dying from an invasive blight.  If you can connect with the gardeners that maintain these estates you should be able to get some of this wood that would otherwise be burned.  You would then need a small bandsaw to break it down into billets suitable for your Byrnes saw.
 
Roger

One thing I forgot. I find that I now use a hand-held coping saw far more than the electrical scroll saw. It needs no set up (other than a good home-made bench pin), and is very accurate, especially for the tiny pieces we often have to handle. It's also quite cheap!
 
Of course, you can do very well indeed without any of the electrical equipment (and many modellers do), but some of it, especially the table saw and drill with a stand, makes the work a lot faster and easier.
 
Tony

After reading your post and the tasks you anticipate doing, I would say that a table saw is the tool you will use the most in those applications. This is especially true if you anticipate fabricating deck gratings, window frames, and such. However, it must be a highly accurate and sufficiently powerful mini-table saw. (It's got to be able to zip through rock-hard wood, not just balsa and basswood!) Accuracy is really critical. You'll also want a saw with a good precision cross-sawing sled.
 
"If you take milling/planking your own timber out of the equation would a Byrnes table saw or a mini mill be of more use for the tasks I listed."  The table saw is still the more useful by a long shot, in my opinion. Of greater concern, however, is the fact that you are not likely able to "take milling/planking your own timber out of the equation." At an ever-increasing rate, pre-milled dimensioned modeling wood is becoming unavailable. There just isn't enough demand for it that anybody can make a living making and selling it. There's some poor and medium grade modeling woods still commercially available in dimensioned sizes, but practically none in quality species anymore, but you'll quickly run into problems finding the size you need.  Moreover, when you mill your own on your own table saw, you have a far wider selection of woods to chose from, many which can be sourced for nothing or close to it. Just look at all the posts in here from people asking "Where do I buy wood?" 
 
You can use the MSW search engine and read what is probably the most extensive collection of hands-on reviews and information on the Byrnes table saw anywhere on the internet. You aren't likely to see one in the flesh before you buy it unless you find your way to somebody near you who has one, or visit Jim Byrnes in Florida where he builds them. See: https://byrnesmodelmachines.com/ I do not expect anyone will argue with the assertion that there is no mini-saw available anywhere that comes anywhere close to the Byrnes table saw. It's as simple as that. Spending money on anything else means getting a lot less "bang for your buck." The Byrnes saw, while not inexpensive, it wicked accurate and an extremely high quality piece of machinery. There's no way anybody beats their personalized customer service. That's what one should expect from what is essentially a bespoke high-tolerance machine tool.
 
That said, I regret to inform you that if the reports from your countrymen are accurate, shipping, import duties, and taxes raise the cost of any machine from Byrnes Model Machines, or much of anything else from this side of the Pond, beyond what many feel they can justify spending. As I'm sure this situation affects everyone in in the UK similarly, you may be able to find a "work around" that makes it less painful for you than others have found those drawbacks to be.

After reading your post and the tasks you anticipate doing, I would say that a table saw is the tool you will use the most in those applications. This is especially true if you anticipate fabricating deck gratings, window frames, and such. However, it must be a highly accurate and sufficiently powerful mini-table saw. (It's got to be able to zip through rock-hard wood, not just balsa and basswood!) Accuracy is really critical. You'll also want a saw with a good precision cross-sawing sled.
 
"If you take milling/planking your own timber out of the equation would a Byrnes table saw or a mini mill be of more use for the tasks I listed."  The table saw is still the more useful by a long shot, in my opinion. Of greater concern, however, is the fact that you are not likely able to "take milling/planking your own timber out of the equation." At an ever-increasing rate, pre-milled dimensioned modeling wood is becoming unavailable. There just isn't enough demand for it that anybody can make a living making and selling it. There's some poor and medium grade modeling woods still commercially available in dimensioned sizes, but practically none in quality species anymore, but you'll quickly run into problems finding the size you need.  Moreover, when you mill your own on your own table saw, you have a far wider selection of woods to chose from, many which can be sourced for nothing or close to it. Just look at all the posts in here from people asking "Where do I buy wood?" 
 
You can use the MSW search engine and read what is probably the most extensive collection of hands-on reviews and information on the Byrnes table saw anywhere on the internet. You aren't likely to see one in the flesh before you buy it unless you find your way to somebody near you who has one, or visit Jim Byrnes in Florida where he builds them. See: https://byrnesmodelmachines.com/ I do not expect anyone will argue with the assertion that there is no mini-saw available anywhere that comes anywhere close to the Byrnes table saw. It's as simple as that. Spending money on anything else means getting a lot less "bang for your buck." The Byrnes saw, while not inexpensive, it wicked accurate and an extremely high quality piece of machinery. There's no way anybody beats their personalized customer service. That's what one should expect from what is essentially a bespoke high-tolerance machine tool.
 
That said, I regret to inform you that if the reports from your countrymen are accurate, shipping, import duties, and taxes raise the cost of any machine from Byrnes Model Machines, or much of anything else from this side of the Pond, beyond what many feel they can justify spending. As I'm sure this situation affects everyone in in the UK similarly, you may be able to find a "work around" that makes it less painful for you than others have found those drawbacks to be.

I once helped a master boatbuilder friend plank a whole 35' sharpie hull with the stuff. I loved it. He used it throughout the boat. I saved a few pieces for small projects of my own, but, sad to say, we threw the rest of the offcuts into the shop woodstove. We weren't thinking of it as modeling wood at the time! It's amazing stuff. There's whole stands of it standing dead in southern Alaska. It will last for almost a hundred years like that. It's range is moving due to climate change. Counterintuitively, due to global warming, the thinning winter snowpacks expose the roots to freezing which kills the tree. For this reason, it's under consideration for threatened or endangered status.  One could probably harvest all they wanted up there, but it's not commercially viable getting it out of where it is.
 
it makes you want to cry.
 

I doubt that it has any relevance for lower Florida,  but if I was back in central Kentucky, younger, and had the tools I have now, I would see about trying to accumulate a warehouse size supply of Apple billets.
 
Anthony,  That Castello is dear in both price and the vanishing prospect of obtaining more.  A thought - you might consider reserving it for making blocks and deck furniture - .
I suggest getting some Hard Maple to get practice on ripping.  It is as close as you are likely to come to being as hard as Castello,  you can get as much as you want and the cost is reasonable.  Get lots of practice using the Maple.  And who knows, you may come to like it.  Save the rare expensive wood for a magnum opus .

Mike, 
 
I have no problem at all with you disagreeing about this. 
You are offering an alternative to becoming a solo sawmill for Europe.   I have the hope that by waving the home sawmill red flag,  a similar alternative for North America will make an appearance and refute me. This is an often asked question, here.  I do not recall reading an easy answer to it.  I am expressing what I feel is a realistic view of what is involved with scratch POF - at least here in North America.  I totally support the ambition for scratch POF.  I wish the that the barrier into it was a low one.  I find the wiederholen Sie das , (or singing Kathlene over the ship's intercom) aspect of kits to be ....wearing.  
 
The whole solo sawmill option is really a distraction from our primary goal.   The advantages are an increase in the number of species of wood that can be used and that after several hulls, the investment in tools is recovered -  as long as you leave your man hours expended out of the equation. It also offers some comfort to those of us who are driven to be as self sufficient as is possible.  But, it is impossible to be compensated at an hourly rate that is commensurate with that for the necessary skill level to do this.  Including that factor would probably keep any recouping of expenditure impossible.  But, since the alternative use of that time would not likely be a money making activity, it probably should be excluded.
 
You have access to one of the first line species and in a form that is readily usable.  From some build logs  it seems that Pear is not difficult to source in Europe.  I trust that you appreciate your good fortune with that.  And also value those who do the work to mill it for you.  In North America, it is fast becoming a situation where it is rare to source any milled stock other than the totally awful Balsa or the merely terrible Basswood.  Its cousin Linden/Lime is about 100% better, but that is not really available here.  Pear in any form is difficult to find and the price is prohibitive.